U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-25-2007, 12:24 PM
 
Location: Small patch of terra firma
1,275 posts, read 2,128,746 times
Reputation: 536

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by english_teacher View Post
Why should an unemployed, unskilled worker with a third world mentality be allowed to vote to take money from a working person through tax increases? How many voters will click on Obama, Clinton, or Richardson solely because the candidates are black, female or Hispanic without any understanding of their political ideology? Uneducated voters lead to increased rent-seeking policies--weak, ineffective people demanding subsidies and getting them.

Education matters.
So there are no black, female, or hispanic republicans? How many people voted for bush because heís a republican. Or was it because heís white? Wait, so was gore and kerry, so were they republicans? wait, now you've lost me. Is not consistently voting for someone based on their race a "consistent foundation"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by english_teacher View Post
Perhaps religious ideology is offensive to some; liberal or neocon ideologies might be offensive too. The point isn't the offensiveness of the ideology but that voting without any consistent foundation is unsound voting pracitices. Do 18 yr. olds have any foundation?
So if I I'm a college graduate that majored in American History and I always vote the same party line because that's how I was raised, and I dont bother to know the candidate or consider the achievments, that's ok in your book because my consistent foundation is to always vote my party line? So Iím educated but not about the candidates but have a consistent voting record: vote the party line.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-25-2007, 12:50 PM
 
146 posts, read 531,010 times
Reputation: 180
Arrow Ideology vs. Consistency

Being in college doesn't mean you're educated. Having a degree certainly doesn't guarantee it either. That's a great thread topic though, what does it mean to be educated?

That you've chosen to vote consistently speaks nothing to your ideology; and doing so without understanding is consistently unethical at best. Some would say stupid, but not me.

Voting for Obama because he's black or cute (or voting for anyone based on these kind of factors) rather than voting based on ideology is unsound and doesn't serve a democracy.

So yes, education does matter in as much as a voter understands the ideology of candidates and is consistent in their own ideology. That voters need to read English, have a thorough understanding of our republic and its constitution, and all the other goodies that go into being good citizens, can only help our society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2007, 01:06 PM
 
Location: Small patch of terra firma
1,275 posts, read 2,128,746 times
Reputation: 536
Quote:
Originally Posted by english_teacher View Post
Being in college doesn't mean you're educated. Having a degree certainly doesn't guarantee it either. That's a great thread topic though, what does it mean to be educated?

That you've chosen to vote consistently speaks nothing to your ideology; and doing so without understanding is consistently unethical at best. Some would say stupid, but not me.

Voting for Obama because he's black or cute (or voting for anyone based on these kind of factors) rather than voting based on ideology is unsound and doesn't serve a democracy.

So yes, education does matter in as much as a voter understands the ideology of candidates and is consistent in their own ideology. That voters need to read English, have a thorough understanding of our republic and its constitution, and all the other goodies that go into being good citizens, can only help our society.
Every post you make seems to go somewhere else from your last. So voting based on religious ideology is ok or not? Voting based on a church recommendation is ok or not? Voting based on race and party line is ok or not? Voting based on party affiliation is ok or not? Voting based on race is ok or not? If your ideology is that a minority candidate probably understands your needs, is voting for that candidate right or wrong? What's the difference between that voter and voter who votes from their church recommendation but actually doesnt know anything about the candidate but the assumption of ideology? Does it matter if that candidate is a democrat or republican because you keep singling out the minority candidates who are democrats?

Last edited by madicarus2000; 01-25-2007 at 01:07 PM.. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2007, 01:24 PM
 
20,382 posts, read 37,949,187 times
Reputation: 18194
Default We actually agree on a few things....

Quote:
Originally Posted by english_teacher View Post
Being in college doesn't mean you're educated. Having a degree certainly doesn't guarantee it either. <snip> A: True. And there are plenty of very educated people who understand our Constitution and our Republic just fine, but who STILL vote poorly, or not at all, or commit horrible crimes... Enron comes to mind along with hundreds of others. Many of these educated types will vote selfishly or vote along racial lines or whatever. I don't think people will ever agree on who or what course of action are the best choices for our votes, that's where honest debate can help, but even then, there are so many ways to skin the cat on HOW to achieve "what's best" that we will debate endlessly. Defining what's best (tax cuts vs a balanced budget or "how" to fix education) is so hard to pin down that the best we can do is try to find as much factual data as we can and go with what seems the right thing to do.

<snip>

That voters ... have a thorough understanding of our republic and its constitution, and all the other goodies that go into being good citizens, can only help our society. A: Of course, this would be wonderful, but we cannot exclude from voting those not fitting this "test" or any other test, other than the test that they're a citizen (non-felon) and registered to vote. Tying the right to vote to any sort of learnedness is a slippery slope and not truly supported here by a good argument, nor was it ever supportable... wasn't it the Supreme Court that struck down all the old highly discriminatory "literacy laws" on who could vote in the South? It would further be great if all citizens had a good grasp of economics, finance and taxation too, but let's not hold our breath on these either.
So, all that being said, what thread do we tackle next...cause I'm done with this one. Best wishes to all.
s/mike from back east
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2007, 10:50 AM
 
146 posts, read 531,010 times
Reputation: 180
Arrow Free Speech?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post
So, all that being said, what thread do we tackle next...cause I'm done with this one.
This type of response is nothing less than intimidation to stop discourse.

A four star thread is essentially being shut down because Mike, a moderator no less, can't wrap his mind around the premise that perhaps, not all people should be voting.

Being dismissive in any thread discussion is a passive-aggressive tactic that doesn't serve the audience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2007, 11:14 AM
 
8,709 posts, read 3,513,105 times
Moderator or not, everyone is entitled to express their opinion. We do not discriminate anyone - that's free speech. Besides, Mike is not a moderator for this particular forum. I wonder why you are so easily intimidated?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2007, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Small patch of terra firma
1,275 posts, read 2,128,746 times
Reputation: 536
Quote:
Originally Posted by english_teacher View Post
This type of response is nothing less than intimidation to stop discourse.
Or itís his decision to leave the debate since he feels heís made his point. I didnít see it as a cessation of all discussions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by english_teacher View Post
A four star thread is essentially being shut down because Mike, a moderator no less, can't wrap his mind around the premise that perhaps, not all people should be voting.
He had a different viewpoint and made his arguments known and left. Iím not sure how it is being shut down. The thread still exists. However in reading his responses, I think he appears to understand that yeah, maybe not all people should vote but as long as they meet the minimum requirement, that is a US citizen of legal age who is a registered voter, they have the right and should not be denied that right no matter how much you donít like their voting habits or educational skills. If you want to turn the discussion towards illegal immigrants voting, then thatís a different topic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by english_teacher View Post
Being dismissive in any thread discussion is a passive-aggressive tactic that doesn't serve the audience.
Again, some people prefer to make their point and leave. Some prefer to debate the same points over and over. Heís entitled to dimiss the discussion if he chooses, just like you can. It doesnít mean the argument/debate is over.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2007, 12:03 PM
 
8,709 posts, read 3,513,105 times
If I may suggest going back to the topic of the thread, please?
Any complaints about particular members should be filed via PM to a mod. Complaints about mods - to senior mods (me or Yac). Complaints about seniors - to the Admin. Complaints about the Admin... well, you're out of luck.
Anyway, stay on topic please and refrain from personal issues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2007, 12:09 AM
 
Location: Earth
17,449 posts, read 23,082,988 times
Reputation: 7248
Quote:
Originally Posted by english_teacher View Post
We've made a mistake allowing anyone 18 and older to vote. At least some restrictions need to entertained (race, color, creed aside of course),.
Do you think that only men shouldn't be allowed to vote, also? The idea of repealing the 19th Amendment is starting to be talked about in Religious Right circles. It isn't just a Borat joke. It's quite scary, actually. There is also talk in some right wing circles about repealing the law forbidding poll taxes in the US - this is also REALLY scary.

If anything, not enough people are voting. There needs to be a law against revoking the franchise from convicted felons. I don't even have a problem with prisoners voting (oddly enough the only state that allows this is conservative Utah)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top